MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792543142 · doi:10.1080/23270012.2018.1443405

Editorial to the special issue “Transdisciplinary analytics in supply chain management”

2018· article· en· W2792543142 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management Analytics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsAnalyticsSupply chainSupply chain managementData scienceScale (ratio)Computer scienceManagement scienceEngineering managementSystems engineeringEngineering ethicsRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringBusinessGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last two decades of designing large-scale engineering systems have demonstrated that the even higher complexity of problems requires entirely new solution approaches. Transdisciplinary engineering (TE) is a means to overcome the limits of inter- or multi- disciplinary approaches. For such challenges, transdisciplinary research and processes are focused on solving ill-defined and society-relevant problems, like sustainability and environmental problems. It has still not received much attention, in particular, when the decision-making is difficult due to the lack of a suitable analytical basis. TE requires extensive IT support to manage and control the large amount of data and knowledge produced and used in TE processes. It is implemented through the follow- ing processes (Wognum et al., in press).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it